Is BIOS flashed HD 6970 the best bang for your buck Gaming GPU in history?

[QUOTE="Xtasy26"]

[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

Radeon 9500 could be transformed into a 9700. The 9700 was $90 to $100 more than the 9500 back in 2004.

nameless125

...But could a 9500 max out all games @1080P like Doom 3 or Far Cry in 2004. ;) The answer is a simply NO.

What is there to lol about?

I wasn't talking about 1080P. Can your 8800 GTX max out 99% of games @1080P? No.

Xtasy26

Dont tell me you were asking if the 8800 can do that today?

I would not disagree. Point I was making I could do the same for the same price but at higher resolution. For example, 9700 Pro costs $400 when it came out, my BIOS flashed HD 6970 costs me $289.99. Hence my argument it's best bang for your buck, not just it was a good deal but you could push higher resolutions at lower price points that older GPU's couldn't.

Xtasy26

8800GTS 512MB could max most games at 1080p and so did the 4870, both cards were in the same price range you are talking about.

imo the best bang for the buck is the Radeon HD 6850 by Gigabyte available on Amazon.com ( US )

Edit: actually it is newegg now o.O

When the 8800GTX came it was able to max most games at 25x16 let alone 1080p...

Dont tell me you were asking if the 8800 can do that today?

Gambler_3

And how much did the 8800 GTX cost when it came out, oh wait, $650. Hardly best bang for your buck. That's OVER twice the cost of my BIOS flashed HD 6970. :lol:

8800GTS 512MB could max most games at 1080p and so did the 4870, both cards were in the same price range you are talking about.

Gambler_3

It couldn't max out Crysis @1080P. You would have to tone it down to something like 900P and medium settings to get playable framerates. That's far off from 1080P.

It couldn't max out Crysis @1080P. You would have to tone it down to something like 900P and medium settings to get playable framerates. That's far off from 1080P.

Xtasy26

And you cant max crysis 2? You cant max metro 2033? lol fail.

But lets just forget this, let me break your entire argument.

You are saying that your card is essentially a 6970 and that 6 months down the road it is still more expensive than your card? Well I am pretty sure one can still find a reference 6950 so there goes your cost argument. I mean why shouldnt someone just buy a reference 6950 instead of buying a 6970 if they are comfortable with modding and flashing? Is your 6950 the only card that becomes a 6970? Since it is not how does your card have a value of $340 when a $290 card can still do it?

Here this card becomes a 6970 so get this now once and for all, your card is not $60 more than what you paid for it. There goes your entire argument but I'll still continue.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814102951

Do you realise that a BIOS flashed 6950 still does NOT overclock as much as a real 6970?? Or are you just going to ignore it?? 6970 will still ultimately perform better so you arent really getting a $50 more expensive card by getting a reference 6950. If an overclocked 6970 can beat a modded 6950 then they are not the same cards sorry.

What basically is the case here is that your card has held it's value for 6 months which is no big deal as other cards like the GTX 570 and 580 have done the same and for longer. Secondly your card gives alot of performance boost by modding and overclocking which is again no big deal as the likes of GTX 460 and 560 also give a very significant boost with overclocking. And in the case of 6950 you get a bigger boost with overclocking than with unlocking the shaders, it's a hugely overrated feature, gives you only a 5% boost at best.

And taking your ridiculous original logic, here's something for you.

So basically an overclocked GTX 570 beats a stock GTX 580. That means whoever bought a GTX 570 has a card that has a value of over $150 than what they paid, OMFG best deal EVER! :shock:

And where exactly can you buy a GTX 560 Ti and 6950 1GB for $200? Man what a load of fail this whole thread is, I never gave it a thought that you might be trolling.

And where exactly can you buy a GTX 560 Ti and 6950 1GB for $200? Man what a load of fail this whole thread is, I never gave it a thought that you might be trolling.

Gambler_3

And where exactly can you buy a GTX 560 Ti and 6950 1GB for $200? Man what a load of fail this whole thread is, I never gave it a thought that you might be trolling.

Gambler_3

Fail. Newegg is selling XFX 6950 1 GB for $209. I know people who brought for $200 with rebates. Not only that you get a free copy of Deus Ex with the purchase, which is an incredible deal.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814150523

^^

[QUOTE="Xtasy26"]

It couldn't max out Crysis @1080P. You would have to tone it down to something like 900P and medium settings to get playable framerates. That's far off from 1080P.

Gambler_3

And you cant max crysis 2? You cant max metro 2033? lol fail.

But lets just forget this, let me break your entire argument.

You are saying that your card is essentially a 6970 and that 6 months down the road it is still more expensive than your card? Well I am pretty sure one can still find a reference 6950 so there goes your cost argument. I mean why shouldnt someone just buy a reference 6950 instead of buying a 6970 if they are comfortable with modding and flashing? Is your 6950 the only card that becomes a 6970? Since it is not how does your card have a value of $340 when a $290 card can still do it?

Here this card becomes a 6970 so get this now once and for all, your card is not $60 more than what you paid for it. There goes your entire argument but I'll still continue.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814102951

Do you realise that a BIOS flashed 6950 still does NOT overclock as much as a real 6970?? Or are you just going to ignore it?? 6970 will still ultimately perform better so you arent really getting a $50 more expensive card by getting a reference 6950. If an overclocked 6970 can beat a modded 6950 then they are not the same cards sorry.

What basically is the case here is that your card has held it's value for 6 months which is no big deal as other cards like the GTX 570 and 580 have done the same and for longer. Secondly your card gives alot of performance boost by modding and overclocking which is again no big deal as the likes of GTX 460 and 560 also give a very significant boost with overclocking. And in the case of 6950 you get a bigger boost with overclocking than with unlocking the shaders, it's a hugely overrated feature, gives you only a 5% boost at best.

And taking your ridiculous original logic, here's something for you.

So basically an overclocked GTX 570 beats a stock GTX 580. That means whoever bought a GTX 570 has a card that has a value of over $150 than what they paid, OMFG best deal EVER! :shock:

First of all I could max out Crysis 2 with all setting at 1080P minus tesselation which by the way is due to a bug, AMD is working to fix it, if not already. Metro 2033 can max out everything minus DOF (which doesn't make a difference) where as you are comparing Crysis running at not only low resolution but with many many settings below Very High and that's not even @1080P. Lol. Logic fail.

And I am not talking about all 6950's I am talking certain batch, hence my argument BIOS flashed HD 6970. And you wrong about BIOS flashed HD 6970 not overclocking as much as a real 6970. It can. It's essentially a HD 6970 with a different sticker on the GPU.

Thirdly, your argument that you could overclock a HD 6950 and getting the performance of a HD 6970 is illogical. Because I took can overclock my BIOS flashed HD 6970 and get even more performance.

My card does have a value of nearly $100 more even after 8+ months.

Look at the link provided in my opening.

You say the GTX 570 and 580 has held it's value for longer. But did they cost nearly $100 more even after 8+ month's? NO. So, there goes your argument down the drain.

So basically an overclocked GTX 570 beats a stock GTX 580. That means whoever bought a GTX 570 has a card that has a value of over $150 than what they paid, OMFG best deal EVER! :shock:

Gambler_3

I have a GTX 570 and have it clocked at 900/1800/2000.

It only takes around 840mhz core clock to match a GTX 580 stock in a lot of games.

I can't find a benchmark of Lostplanet 2 of Test B on a gtx 580 setup but while recording mine recieved over 46fps average while a GTX 570 normally recieves around 36fps.

Add about 10 more fps when not recording for my GTX and 7 more for the stock readings.

[QUOTE="Xtasy26"]

First of all I could max out Crysis 2 with all setting at 1080P minus tesselation which by the way is due to a bug, AMD is working to fix it, if not already. Metro 2033 can max out everything minus DOF (which doesn't make a difference) where as you are comparing Crysis running at not only low resolution but with many many settings below Very High and that's not even @1080P. Lol. Logic fail.

And I am not talking about all 6950's I am talking certain batch, hence my argument BIOS flashed HD 6970. And you wrong about BIOS flashed HD 6970 not overclocking as much as a real 6970. It can. It's essentially a HD 6970 with a different sticker on the GPU.

Thirdly, your argument that you could overclock a HD 6950 and getting the performance of a HD 6970 is illogical. Because I took can overclock my BIOS flashed HD 6970 and get even more performance.

My card does have a value of nearly $100 more even after 8+ months.

Look at the link provided in my opening.

You say the GTX 570 and 580 has held it's value for longer. But did they cost nearly $100 more even after 8+ month's? NO. So, there goes your argument down the drain.

Gambler_3

OMG THIS IS SO DAMN FUNNY. :lol:

"My BIOS flashed 6970" My my my my you sound like a little kid who got a toy for the first time. :lol:

I linked you to a 6950 which flashes to a 6970 and yet you continue with the gibberish that your card has higher value never mind the fact that 6970 isnt actually $100 more. :roll:

And yes I know I'll be modded for this but not that I care, this is too gud to pass on. :lol:

Yet, you still can't debunk my claim that a GTX 570 and 580 didn't cost $100 more 8 month's after it's realeased. Gee I wonder why? :roll:

How doesn't my card doesn't have a higher value when the same card goes for nearly $100 more. If a HD 6970 doesn't costs $100 more than what the hell is this:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814150531&Tpk=XFX%20HD%206970

^^ It costs nearly $389, while my BIOS flashed HD 6970 costs $289.99 in January. So, your argument is logic fail.

^^ It costs nearly $389, while my BIOS flashed HD 6970 costs $289.99 in January. So, your argument is logic fail.

Xtasy26

And,

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814161356

[QUOTE="Xtasy26"]

^^ It costs nearly $389, while my BIOS flashed HD 6970 costs $289.99 in January. So, your argument is logic fail.

Gambler_3

And,

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814161356

Well no duh it's not a factory HD 6970, hence my argument a "flashed HD 6970" is the best bang for your buck.

And your link you provided doesn't costs $290 it costs $339.99 plus shipping which is $50 more than what I paid for 8+ months ago. If you look at the XFX HD 6970 in my first post it costs over $90+ more.

And I am still waiting for your answer as to if a GTX 570 & 580 costs $50- $90 MORE 8+ months after it was released.

Well no duh it's not a factory HD 6970, hence my argument a "flashed HD 6970" is the best bang for your buck.

And your link you provided doesn't costs $290 it costs $339.99 plus shipping which is $50 more than what I paid for 8+ months ago. If you look at the XFX HD 6970 in my first post it costs over $90+ more.

And I am still waiting for your answer as to if a GTX 570 & 580 costs $50- $90 MORE 8+ months after it was released.

Xtasy26

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814102951

It easily converts into a 6970, this IS what you have not a real 6970.

No card costs more 6 months down the road and neither does yours, if they had completely stopped making reference 6950's then you could have had an argument but please stop with this non-sense now.

At this point I don't believe this thread serves any useful purpose and should be locked by a MOD !

*+

[QUOTE="Xtasy26"]

Well no duh it's not a factory HD 6970, hence my argument a "flashed HD 6970" is the best bang for your buck.

And your link you provided doesn't costs $290 it costs $339.99 plus shipping which is $50 more than what I paid for 8+ months ago. If you look at the XFX HD 6970 in my first post it costs over $90+ more.

And I am still waiting for your answer as to if a GTX 570 & 580 costs $50- $90 MORE 8+ months after it was released.

Gambler_3

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814102951

It easily converts into a 6970, this IS what you have not a real 6970.

No card costs more 6 months down the road and neither does yours, if they had completely stopped making reference 6950's then you could have had an argument but please stop with this non-sense now.

You are not reading. A BIOS flashed HD 6970 is a 'real' HD 6970. The only thing that's different is the sticker on the graphics card. Hence, the argument that it's the best bang for your buck becuase the item in question cost's MORE than it was orginial costs becuase it's being BIOS flased to a product that costs $50-$90 MORE than the original slated price event after nearly 9 months later. So, how is that nonsense? You are getting the same product for $50-$90 LESS than the more expensive product. This is not rocket science.

[QUOTE="Gambler_3"]

[QUOTE="Xtasy26"]

Well no duh it's not a factory HD 6970, hence my argument a "flashed HD 6970" is the best bang for your buck.

And your link you provided doesn't costs $290 it costs $339.99 plus shipping which is $50 more than what I paid for 8+ months ago. If you look at the XFX HD 6970 in my first post it costs over $90+ more.

And I am still waiting for your answer as to if a GTX 570 & 580 costs $50- $90 MORE 8+ months after it was released.

Xtasy26

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814102951

It easily converts into a 6970, this IS what you have not a real 6970.

No card costs more 6 months down the road and neither does yours, if they had completely stopped making reference 6950's then you could have had an argument but please stop with this non-sense now.

You are not reading. A BIOS flashed HD 6970 is a 'real' HD 6970. The only thing that's different is the sticker on the graphics card. Hence, the argument that it's the best bang for your buck becuase the item in question cost's MORE than it was orginial costs becuase it's being BIOS flased to a product that costs $50-$90 MORE than the original slated price event after nearly 9 months later. So, how is that nonsense? You are getting the same product for $50-$90 LESS than the more expensive product. This is not rocket science.

[QUOTE="Gambler_3"]

[QUOTE="Xtasy26"]

Well no duh it's not a factory HD 6970, hence my argument a "flashed HD 6970" is the best bang for your buck.

And your link you provided doesn't costs $290 it costs $339.99 plus shipping which is $50 more than what I paid for 8+ months ago. If you look at the XFX HD 6970 in my first post it costs over $90+ more.

And I am still waiting for your answer as to if a GTX 570 & 580 costs $50- $90 MORE 8+ months after it was released.

Xtasy26

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814102951

It easily converts into a 6970, this IS what you have not a real 6970.

No card costs more 6 months down the road and neither does yours, if they had completely stopped making reference 6950's then you could have had an argument but please stop with this non-sense now.

You are not reading. A BIOS flashed HD 6970 is a 'real' HD 6970. The only thing that's different is the sticker on the graphics card. Hence, the argument that it's the best bang for your buck becuase the item in question cost's MORE than it was orginial costs becuase it's being BIOS flased to a product that costs $50-$90 MORE than the original slated price event after nearly 9 months later. So, how is that nonsense? You are getting the same product for $50-$90 LESS than the more expensive product. This is not rocket science.

It's true 6950 is one of the best bang for buck this generation along with GTX 460. The reason why I find the ability to flash the 6950 so overrated is because there is only 5% difference between 6950 and 6970 running at the same clocks which can be done with any 6950 even the 1GB one. And btw they arent exactly the same, 6970 has an 8-pin and 6-pin PCIE connector whereas 6950 has 2x6-pin which is bound to put a limitation with extreme overclocking I would think.

There is only a 10-15% performance difference between 6950 and 6970. 6970 doesnt overclock much so the maximum performance gain you get out of a 6950 is probably 20% with BIOS flash and maximum OC.

A stock GTX 460 1GB when overclocked to the max gives the same performance boost if not more thus 6950 is not the undisputed bang for buck king this gen.

[QUOTE="Xtasy26"]

[QUOTE="Gambler_3"]This is the card I am talking about, it costs $290 and $270 after rebate.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814102951

It easily converts into a 6970, this IS what you have not a real 6970.

No card costs more 6 months down the road and neither does yours, if they had completely stopped making reference 6950's then you could have had an argument but please stop with this non-sense now.

nameless125

You are not reading. A BIOS flashed HD 6970 is a 'real' HD 6970. The only thing that's different is the sticker on the graphics card. Hence, the argument that it's the best bang for your buck becuase the item in question cost's MORE than it was orginial costs becuase it's being BIOS flased to a product that costs $50-$90 MORE than the original slated price event after nearly 9 months later. So, how is that nonsense? You are getting the same product for $50-$90 LESS than the more expensive product. This is not rocket science.

Well, I don't know how many can and can unlock. Hence, I am referring to BIOS flashed HD 6970.

[QUOTE="Xtasy26"]

[QUOTE="Gambler_3"]This is the card I am talking about, it costs $290 and $270 after rebate.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814102951

It easily converts into a 6970, this IS what you have not a real 6970.

No card costs more 6 months down the road and neither does yours, if they had completely stopped making reference 6950's then you could have had an argument but please stop with this non-sense now.

Gambler_3

You are not reading. A BIOS flashed HD 6970 is a 'real' HD 6970. The only thing that's different is the sticker on the graphics card. Hence, the argument that it's the best bang for your buck becuase the item in question cost's MORE than it was orginial costs becuase it's being BIOS flased to a product that costs $50-$90 MORE than the original slated price event after nearly 9 months later. So, how is that nonsense? You are getting the same product for $50-$90 LESS than the more expensive product. This is not rocket science.

It's true 6950 is one of the best bang for buck this generation along with GTX 460. The reason why I find the ability to flash the 6950 so overrated is because there is only 5% difference between 6950 and 6970 running at the same clocks which can be done with any 6950 even the 1GB one. And btw they arent exactly the same, 6970 has an 8-pin and 6-pin PCIE connector whereas 6950 has 2x6-pin which is bound to put a limitation with extreme overclocking I would think.

There is only a 10-15% performance difference between 6950 and 6970. 6970 doesnt overclock much so the maximum performance gain you get out of a 6950 is probably 20% with BIOS flash and maximum OC.

A stock GTX 460 1GB when overclocked to the max gives the same performance boost if not more thus 6950 is not the undisputed bang for buck king this gen.

How am I not makin any sense. You have yet to debunk my claim that a GTX 470 and 480 and 460 didn't costs $50-$90 MORE after 8+ month's after it was released. It is true that the difference in some cases between a stock 6950 and 6970 maybe around 5%, but that also depends on the game. In some cases it's even more than that, in some cases is 10%-15%, as mentioned by you, which is hardly "not significant". What is not significant is the extra two pins on the HD 6970's. The extra 2 pins doesn't limit ones ability to overclock like a stock 6970. The voltage can merely be upped using AMD CCC as well as MSI Afterburner.

Did a stock GTX 460 cost's MORE than $50-$90 MORE after it's release nearly 9 month's later? NO, hence a BIOS flashed easily takes the crown with respect to price and performance.

How am I not makin any sense. You have yet to debunk my claim that a GTX 470 and 480 and 460 didn't costs $50-$90 MORE after 8+ month's after it was released. It is true that the difference in some cases between a stock 6950 and 6970 maybe around 5%, but that also depends on the game. In some cases it's even more than that, in some cases is 10%-15%, as mentioned by you, which is hardly "not significant". What is not significant is the extra two pins on the HD 6970's. The extra 2 pins doesn't limit ones ability to overclock like a stock 6970. The voltage can merely be upped using AMD CCC as well as MSI Afterburner.

Did a stock GTX 460 cost's MORE than $50-$90 MORE after it's release nearly 9 month's later? NO, hence a BIOS flashed easily takes the crown with respect to price and performance.

Xtasy26

/thread.

[QUOTE="Xtasy26"]

How am I not makin any sense. You have yet to debunk my claim that a GTX 470 and 480 and 460 didn't costs $50-$90 MORE after 8+ month's after it was released. It is true that the difference in some cases between a stock 6950 and 6970 maybe around 5%, but that also depends on the game. In some cases it's even more than that, in some cases is 10%-15%, as mentioned by you, which is hardly "not significant". What is not significant is the extra two pins on the HD 6970's. The extra 2 pins doesn't limit ones ability to overclock like a stock 6970. The voltage can merely be upped using AMD CCC as well as MSI Afterburner.

Did a stock GTX 460 cost's MORE than $50-$90 MORE after it's release nearly 9 month's later? NO, hence a BIOS flashed easily takes the crown with respect to price and performance.

Gambler_3

/thread.

Who says I was selling it?;) Even if I did, who ever buys it they could still BIOS FLASH it because it's been proven to work on my GPU.

BIOS flashed HD 6950 costs $50-$90 LESS than a regular HD 6970, even after nearly 9 month's after it's release. That's unheard of in the history of the GPU industry.

BIOS flashed HD 6970 IS the best bang for your buck in the GPU gaming history. PERIOD.

/Thread.

Who says I was selling it?;) Even if I did, who ever buys it they could still BIOS FLASH it because it's been proven to work on my GPU.

BIOS flashed HD 6950 costs $50-$90 LESS than a regular HD 6970, even after nearly 9 month's after it's release. That's unheard of in the history of the GPU industry.

BIOS flashed HD 6970 IS the best bang for your buck in the GPU gaming history. PERIOD.

/Thread.

Xtasy26

Believe whatever you want but everyone here disagrees with that statement, the 9500 --> 9700 and the 8800GT are the 2 general contenders for best value.

[QUOTE="Xtasy26"]

Who says I was selling it?;) Even if I did, who ever buys it they could still BIOS FLASH it because it's been proven to work on my GPU.

BIOS flashed HD 6950 costs $50-$90 LESS than a regular HD 6970, even after nearly 9 month's after it's release. That's unheard of in the history of the GPU industry.

BIOS flashed HD 6970 IS the best bang for your buck in the GPU gaming history. PERIOD.

/Thread.

GTR12

Believe whatever you want but everyone here disagrees with that statement, the 9500 --> 9700 and the 8800GT are the 2 general contenders for best value.

Exactly. That should be the end of the discussion. Unfortunately, I doubt he will let it be.

[QUOTE="Xtasy26"]

Who says I was selling it?;) Even if I did, who ever buys it they could still BIOS FLASH it because it's been proven to work on my GPU.

BIOS flashed HD 6950 costs $50-$90 LESS than a regular HD 6970, even after nearly 9 month's after it's release. That's unheard of in the history of the GPU industry.

BIOS flashed HD 6970 IS the best bang for your buck in the GPU gaming history. PERIOD.

/Thread.

GTR12

Believe whatever you want but everyone here disagrees with that statement, the 9500 --> 9700 and the 8800GT are the 2 general contenders for best value.

Not everyone. Not going to diagree with your statement about 9500 --> 9700 and the 8800 GT has great contenders for 'best bang for your buck GPU' however those GPU's didn't costs $50 on in my case, XFX HD 6970 costing nearly $90 more nearly 9 month's after it was released. Not to mention, BIOS flashed HD 6970 can push higher resolutions in ALL GAMES that are currently on the market than the respective GPU's mentioned during the time period of their release.

He honestly sounds like this is his first highend gpu. :snameless125

Nope, been using gaming GPU's since I was a kid going back to nVidia's first mass market Gaming GPU, the nVidia Riva 128 (or the 128ZX, which is the one I played games on).:)

[QUOTE="GTR12"]

[QUOTE="Xtasy26"]

Who says I was selling it?;) Even if I did, who ever buys it they could still BIOS FLASH it because it's been proven to work on my GPU.

BIOS flashed HD 6950 costs $50-$90 LESS than a regular HD 6970, even after nearly 9 month's after it's release. That's unheard of in the history of the GPU industry.

BIOS flashed HD 6970 IS the best bang for your buck in the GPU gaming history. PERIOD.

/Thread.

hartsickdiscipl

Believe whatever you want but everyone here disagrees with that statement, the 9500 --> 9700 and the 8800GT are the 2 general contenders for best value.

Exactly. That should be the end of the discussion. Unfortunately, I doubt he will let it be.

Again, not saying those GPU's are not great contenders.

[QUOTE="Gambler_3"]

[QUOTE="Xtasy26"]

Some 19" monitors supported 1920x1200. At least mines got close to that. 9500 didn't even get even close to that. So my point still stands. I may not be able to max out Metro but I could max out....I don't may be MOST GAMES. ;)

Xtasy26

And are you saying that 6950 happens to be the first card that can max MOST GAMES. Oh jeez did you just get a gaming card for the first time and cant get over the excitement?:lol:

8800GTX maxed EVERY game not MOST but EVERY game when it launched and continued to do so for a year when crysis came. 6950 cant even max out games released before it, it barely maxes the original crysis which is a 3 year old game lol and comes to it's knees with metro 2033.

My bad with the resolution. But there were 21" CRT monitors that could output higher resolution. And a 6970 can max out pretty much most games minus things like DOF in Metro 2033 @1080P which doesn't make much of a different and the other game is Crysis 2 (but that was because of tesselation bug) which you could get around with by tweaking some settings. So, HD 6970 could do ALL games minus one or two settings in two games @1080P.

And your comment that a 6950 can "barely maxes teh original Crysis" is a LOL fest. First, of all it's not a 6950 it's a 6970, reading comprehension fail, and secondly I could easilty max out Crysis @1080P with silky smooth framerates and not just "barely max it out". And how much did the 8800 GTX cost when it came out? Oh wait, $600 twice the price of what I paid. Not exactly your best bang for your buck. If you want play the resolutoin game then I could easily lower the resolution to say 1050P and I would easily max out ALL games on my HD 6970. I just wouldn't be able to do it @1080P with maybe 2 games, one of which doesn't even make much of a difference such as Metro 2033 with DOF on. So, my point still stands. :)

your comparison doesn't make any sense, back in 2002 1280x1024 was probably the most common resolution, just like 1920x1080 is today.

the common vram of the day of 64-128MB will not play at the 1920x1080 resolution. It's like trying to play crysis at 2560x1600 on a 6950.

And it's also like saying that xbox 360 is better bang for buck than PS2 just because PS2 didnt play in 720p. :|

[QUOTE="Gambler_3"]

[QUOTE="Xtasy26"]

Well no duh it's not a factory HD 6970, hence my argument a "flashed HD 6970" is the best bang for your buck.

And your link you provided doesn't costs $290 it costs $339.99 plus shipping which is $50 more than what I paid for 8+ months ago. If you look at the XFX HD 6970 in my first post it costs over $90+ more.

And I am still waiting for your answer as to if a GTX 570 & 580 costs $50- $90 MORE 8+ months after it was released.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814102951

It easily converts into a 6970, this IS what you have not a real 6970.

No card costs more 6 months down the road and neither does yours, if they had completely stopped making reference 6950's then you could have had an argument but please stop with this non-sense now.

You are not reading. A BIOS flashed HD 6970 is a 'real' HD 6970. The only thing that's different is the sticker on the graphics card. Hence, the argument that it's the best bang for your buck becuase the item in question cost's MORE than it was orginial costs becuase it's being BIOS flased to a product that costs $50-$90 MORE than the original slated price event after nearly 9 months later. So, how is that nonsense? You are getting the same product for $50-$90 LESS than the more expensive product. This is not rocket science.

And it's also like saying that xbox 360 is better bang for buck than PS2 just because PS2 didnt play in 720p. :|

Gambler_3

That's an awesome analogy. Best one yet on this subject.

[QUOTE="Gambler_3"]

[QUOTE="Xtasy26"] Why do you keep arguing this? You are making sense. Yes I understand your card is flashed but its still not the same hardware.[QUOTE="Xtasy26"]

[QUOTE="Gambler_3"]

[QUOTE="Xtasy26"]

How am I not makin any sense. You have yet to debunk my claim that a GTX 470 and 480 and 460 didn't costs $50-$90 MORE after 8+ month's after it was released. It is true that the difference in some cases between a stock 6950 and 6970 maybe around 5%, but that also depends on the game. In some cases it's even more than that, in some cases is 10%-15%, as mentioned by you, which is hardly "not significant". What is not significant is the extra two pins on the HD 6970's. The extra 2 pins doesn't limit ones ability to overclock like a stock 6970. The voltage can merely be upped using AMD CCC as well as MSI Afterburner.

Did a stock GTX 460 cost's MORE than $50-$90 MORE after it's release nearly 9 month's later? NO, hence a BIOS flashed easily takes the crown with respect to price and performance.

Xtasy26

/thread.

Who says I was selling it?;) Even if I did, who ever buys it they could still BIOS FLASH it because it's been proven to work on my GPU.

BIOS flashed HD 6950 costs $50-$90 LESS than a regular HD 6970, even after nearly 9 month's after it's release. That's unheard of in the history of the GPU industry.

BIOS flashed HD 6970 IS the best bang for your buck in the GPU gaming history. PERIOD.

/Thread.

And it's also like saying that xbox 360 is better bang for buck than PS2 just because PS2 didnt play in 720p. :|

Gambler_3

Did you PS2 costs $50-$90 MORE nearly 9 month's after release? No. So your argument fails.

[QUOTE="Gambler_3"]

And it's also like saying that xbox 360 is better bang for buck than PS2 just because PS2 didnt play in 720p. :|

hartsickdiscipl

That's an awesome analogy. Best one yet on this subject.

Read above. Analogy fail.

[QUOTE="Xtasy26"]

[QUOTE="Gambler_3"]Your 6950 is NOT going to net you the same resale value as a real 6970 so it isnt a 6970.

/thread.

xscrapzx

Who says I was selling it?;) Even if I did, who ever buys it they could still BIOS FLASH it because it's been proven to work on my GPU.

BIOS flashed HD 6950 costs $50-$90 LESS than a regular HD 6970, even after nearly 9 month's after it's release. That's unheard of in the history of the GPU industry.

BIOS flashed HD 6970 IS the best bang for your buck in the GPU gaming history. PERIOD.

/Thread.

Explain, why it has the same number of cores, same GPU clock, memory clock as a HD 6970. Only differene is that 2 extra pins. Whopdedooo. That's quite a difference. ;)

[QUOTE="Xtasy26"]

[QUOTE="Gambler_3"]You realise 19x12 is a widescreen res and 19" CRT's werent widescreen and there is no 19" LCD with that resolution? And what is your point anyways?? Newer technology is obviously going to do better at higher resolutions than the previous generation. :|

And are you saying that 6950 happens to be the first card that can max MOST GAMES. Oh jeez did you just get a gaming card for the first time and cant get over the excitement?:lol:

8800GTX maxed EVERY game not MOST but EVERY game when it launched and continued to do so for a year when crysis came. 6950 cant even max out games released before it, it barely maxes the original crysis which is a 3 year old game lol and comes to it's knees with metro 2033.

GummiRaccoon

My bad with the resolution. But there were 21" CRT monitors that could output higher resolution. And a 6970 can max out pretty much most games minus things like DOF in Metro 2033 @1080P which doesn't make much of a different and the other game is Crysis 2 (but that was because of tesselation bug) which you could get around with by tweaking some settings. So, HD 6970 could do ALL games minus one or two settings in two games @1080P.

And your comment that a 6950 can "barely maxes teh original Crysis" is a LOL fest. First, of all it's not a 6950 it's a 6970, reading comprehension fail, and secondly I could easilty max out Crysis @1080P with silky smooth framerates and not just "barely max it out". And how much did the 8800 GTX cost when it came out? Oh wait, $600 twice the price of what I paid. Not exactly your best bang for your buck. If you want play the resolutoin game then I could easily lower the resolution to say 1050P and I would easily max out ALL games on my HD 6970. I just wouldn't be able to do it @1080P with maybe 2 games, one of which doesn't even make much of a difference such as Metro 2033 with DOF on. So, my point still stands. :)

your comparison doesn't make any sense, back in 2002 1280x1024 was probably the most common resolution, just like 1920x1080 is today.

the common vram of the day of 64-128MB will not play at the 1920x1080 resolution. It's like trying to play crysis at 2560x1600 on a 6950.

But games back in the day didn't require say 512MB of RAM to begin with. And again there were 21" monitors, although rare.

[QUOTE="Gambler_3"]

And it's also like saying that xbox 360 is better bang for buck than PS2 just because PS2 didnt play in 720p. :|

Xtasy26

Did you PS2 costs $50-$90 MORE nearly 9 month's after release? No. So your argument fails.

Your 6950 doesn't cost $50 to $90 more than it did 9 months ago. The fact that it now performs like a 6970 doesn't change the fact that it's not a 6970. There have been plenty of great GPUs over the past decade that have been unlockable to a more powerful version of the brand's product lineup. Often that higher-end card holds it's value until a whole new line of GPUs comes out. The 6970 is one such card. The 6950 unlock allows it to perform like the higher-end card. Is it a great value? Of course. Is it automatically the best? Of course not. Wait 2-3 years and see how it's held up.

Look at the poll results so far. You've been overwhelmingly shot down in your attempt to crown the Bios-flashed 6950 as the best bang for the buck gaming GPU in history. Frankly, I have no idea how you could even think that when an 8800gt can still run a lot of games on high settings up to about 1680x1050 nearly 4 years after release. The 9500 to 9700 mod created a tremendous bang for the buck card back in the day. Both of those were proven to be amazing values and great performers over a period of several years. You're just way too premature in your praise for the BIOS-flashed 6950.

[QUOTE="GummiRaccoon"]

[QUOTE="Xtasy26"]

My bad with the resolution. But there were 21" CRT monitors that could output higher resolution. And a 6970 can max out pretty much most games minus things like DOF in Metro 2033 @1080P which doesn't make much of a different and the other game is Crysis 2 (but that was because of tesselation bug) which you could get around with by tweaking some settings. So, HD 6970 could do ALL games minus one or two settings in two games @1080P.

And your comment that a 6950 can "barely maxes teh original Crysis" is a LOL fest. First, of all it's not a 6950 it's a 6970, reading comprehension fail, and secondly I could easilty max out Crysis @1080P with silky smooth framerates and not just "barely max it out". And how much did the 8800 GTX cost when it came out? Oh wait, $600 twice the price of what I paid. Not exactly your best bang for your buck. If you want play the resolutoin game then I could easily lower the resolution to say 1050P and I would easily max out ALL games on my HD 6970. I just wouldn't be able to do it @1080P with maybe 2 games, one of which doesn't even make much of a difference such as Metro 2033 with DOF on. So, my point still stands. :)

Xtasy26

your comparison doesn't make any sense, back in 2002 1280x1024 was probably the most common resolution, just like 1920x1080 is today.

the common vram of the day of 64-128MB will not play at the 1920x1080 resolution. It's like trying to play crysis at 2560x1600 on a 6950.

But games back in the day didn't require say 512MB of RAM to begin with. And again there were 21" monitors, although rare.

They didn't require a ton of VRAM because they weren't being played at mega huge resolutions.

[QUOTE="Xtasy26"]

[QUOTE="Gambler_3"]

And it's also like saying that xbox 360 is better bang for buck than PS2 just because PS2 didnt play in 720p. :|

hartsickdiscipl

Did you PS2 costs $50-$90 MORE nearly 9 month's after release? No. So your argument fails.

Your 6950 doesn't cost $50 to $90 more than it did 9 months ago. The fact that it now performs like a 6970 doesn't change the fact that it's not a 6970. There have been plenty of great GPUs over the past decade that have been unlockable to a more powerful version of the brand's product lineup. Often that higher-end card holds it's value until a whole new line of GPUs comes out. The 6970 is one such card. The 6950 unlock allows it to perform like the higher-end card. Is it a great value? Of course. Is it automatically the best? Of course not. Wait 2-3 years and see how it's held up.

Look at the poll results so far. You've been overwhelmingly shot down in your attempt to crown the Bios-flashed 6950 as the best bang for the buck gaming GPU in history. Frankly, I have no idea how you could even think that when an 8800gt can still run a lot of games on high settings up to about 1680x1050 nearly 4 years after release. The 9500 to 9700 mod created a tremendous bang for the buck card back in the day. Both of those were proven to be amazing values and great performers over a period of several years. You're just way too premature in your praise for the BIOS-flashed 6950.

And some of the people, like me, arguing against him HAVE A BIOS FLASHED 6950.

It's not a tremendously huge difference. However, something like 9500pro to 9700pro was much much bigger. Going from mid level to high end is a much bigger jump from just a hair below the top of the line to top of the line.

[QUOTE="Xtasy26"]

[QUOTE="Gambler_3"]

And it's also like saying that xbox 360 is better bang for buck than PS2 just because PS2 didnt play in 720p. :|

hartsickdiscipl

Did you PS2 costs $50-$90 MORE nearly 9 month's after release? No. So your argument fails.

Your 6950 doesn't cost $50 to $90 more than it did 9 months ago. The fact that it now performs like a 6970 doesn't change the fact that it's not a 6970. There have been plenty of great GPUs over the past decade that have been unlockable to a more powerful version of the brand's product lineup. Often that higher-end card holds it's value until a whole new line of GPUs comes out. The 6970 is one such card. The 6950 unlock allows it to perform like the higher-end card. Is it a great value? Of course. Is it automatically the best? Of course not. Wait 2-3 years and see how it's held up.

Look at the poll results so far. You've been overwhelmingly shot down in your attempt to crown the Bios-flashed 6950 as the best bang for the buck gaming GPU in history. Frankly, I have no idea how you could even think that when an 8800gt can still run a lot of games on high settings up to about 1680x1050 nearly 4 years after release. The 9500 to 9700 mod created a tremendous bang for the buck card back in the day. Both of those were proven to be amazing values and great performers over a period of several years. You're just way too premature in your praise for the BIOS-flashed 6950.

Actually, a HD 6970 BIOSdid cost's $50-$90, 9 month's ago, when compared to a HD 6950. If you compared the price of for example XFX HD 6950 to aXFX HD 6970 then price was close to $100. Even today it's nearly $90-$100 more. How does it not make an actual HD 6970 when as you put it, "the fact that it now performs like a 6970"? So, you are now counting that it's not an actual HD 6970 just becuase it doesn't have HD 6970 sticker on the graphics card? LOL. I never said that 8800 GT or the 9500 to 9700 were great bang for your buck, I am just saying it's not as great bang for your buck as HD 6950 to a HD 6970. And how exactly do you know that a BIOS flashed HD 6970 won't be able to play games 2-3 years at similar settings that the 8800 GT can do now? You don't.

[QUOTE="Xtasy26"]

[QUOTE="GummiRaccoon"]

your comparison doesn't make any sense, back in 2002 1280x1024 was probably the most common resolution, just like 1920x1080 is today.

the common vram of the day of 64-128MB will not play at the 1920x1080 resolution. It's like trying to play crysis at 2560x1600 on a 6950.

GummiRaccoon

But games back in the day didn't require say 512MB of RAM to begin with. And again there were 21" monitors, although rare.

They didn't require a ton of VRAM because they weren't being played at mega huge resolutions.

That gives further credence to my argument as a BIOS flashed HD 6970 is the best bang for your buck because your getting more for your money as opposed to previous bang for your buck GPU's.

[QUOTE="hartsickdiscipl"]

[QUOTE="Xtasy26"]

Did you PS2 costs $50-$90 MORE nearly 9 month's after release? No. So your argument fails.

GummiRaccoon

Your 6950 doesn't cost $50 to $90 more than it did 9 months ago. The fact that it now performs like a 6970 doesn't change the fact that it's not a 6970. There have been plenty of great GPUs over the past decade that have been unlockable to a more powerful version of the brand's product lineup. Often that higher-end card holds it's value until a whole new line of GPUs comes out. The 6970 is one such card. The 6950 unlock allows it to perform like the higher-end card. Is it a great value? Of course. Is it automatically the best? Of course not. Wait 2-3 years and see how it's held up.

Look at the poll results so far. You've been overwhelmingly shot down in your attempt to crown the Bios-flashed 6950 as the best bang for the buck gaming GPU in history. Frankly, I have no idea how you could even think that when an 8800gt can still run a lot of games on high settings up to about 1680x1050 nearly 4 years after release. The 9500 to 9700 mod created a tremendous bang for the buck card back in the day. Both of those were proven to be amazing values and great performers over a period of several years. You're just way too premature in your praise for the BIOS-flashed 6950.

And some of the people, like me, arguing against him HAVE A BIOS FLASHED 6950.

It's not a tremendously huge difference. However, something like 9500pro to 9700pro was much much bigger. Going from mid level to high end is a much bigger jump from just a hair below the top of the line to top of the line.

Perhaps you could provide us with proofs such as price difference and how long the price difference lasted say 9 months later on.

And it's also like saying that xbox 360 is better bang for buck than PS2 just because PS2 didnt play in 720p. :|

Gambler_3

BTW, your argument that HD 6970 can't max out ALL games is wrong.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/graphics/display/crysis-2-directx11_3.html

@1080P with everything maxed out with 4X FSAA and 16X anistrophic filtering. HD 6970 get's 30+ FPS. And that's with the July drivers. With the August drivers it get's even MORE performance. So, a HD 6970 CAN max out all games on the market. Your arguments fails yet again.

[QUOTE="Gambler_3"]

And it's also like saying that xbox 360 is better bang for buck than PS2 just because PS2 didnt play in 720p. :|

Xtasy26

BTW, your argument that HD 6970 can't max out ALL games is wrong.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/graphics/display/crysis-2-directx11_3.html

@1080P with everything maxed out with 4X FSAA and 16X anistrophic filtering. HD 6970 get's 30+ FPS. And that's with the July drivers. With the August drivers it get's even MORE performance. So, a HD 6970 CAN max out all games on the market. Your arguments fails yet again.

And even if we assume the new drivers give it a serious enough boost in crysis 2...

Yes bro sad reality is your card cant max out a game that came before it's release, I understand your pain but reality can be quite cruel. :cry:

:roll:

[QUOTE="Xtasy26"]

[QUOTE="Gambler_3"]

And it's also like saying that xbox 360 is better bang for buck than PS2 just because PS2 didnt play in 720p. :|

Gambler_3

BTW, your argument that HD 6970 can't max out ALL games is wrong.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/graphics/display/crysis-2-directx11_3.html

@1080P with everything maxed out with 4X FSAA and 16X anistrophic filtering. HD 6970 get's 30+ FPS. And that's with the July drivers. With the August drivers it get's even MORE performance. So, a HD 6970 CAN max out all games on the market. Your arguments fails yet again.

And even if we assume the new drivers give it a serious enough boost in crysis 2...

Yes bro sad reality is your card cant max out a game that came before it's release, I understand your pain but reality can be quite cruel. :cry:

You do realize PhysX is an nVidia application and not an AMD application? LOL. And who says you need a 40 FPS to be playable? I was looking at AVG FPS andHD 6970easily gets above 30+ FPS. That's more than playable.And that's with July drives,AMD made signifant performance boost with their Crysis 2 drivers for August.Halo Reach runs @30 FPS, you are saying that game's is unplayble because it's running @30 FPS? LOL.And what time period is those benchmarks of Metro 2033 posted. HardOCP did benchmarks of Metro 2033 with HD 6970 and GTX 580 and they easily crack 30+ FPS @max settings @1920x1200 with 4X AA, no problems. GTX 580, the world's fastest single GPUgetting 25.4 FPS? Please. :roll: